IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/scient/v113y2017i1d10.1007_s11192-017-2463-2.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The global geography of scientific visibility: a deconcentration process (1999–2011)

Author

Listed:
  • Marion Maisonobe

    (Université de Poitiers
    Université de Toulouse)

  • Michel Grossetti

    (Université de Toulouse)

  • Béatrice Milard

    (Université de Toulouse)

  • Laurent Jégou

    (Université de Toulouse)

  • Denis Eckert

    (Université de Toulouse
    An-Institut der Humboldt Universität)

Abstract

This article aims to ascertain whether the territorial redistribution observed in the geography of scientific production between 1999 and 2008 translated into a redistribution of the geography of citations, and therefore of scientific visibility. Are publications from formerly marginal locations able to influence researchers based in “central locations”, or is their impact mostly “provincial”? Because the distribution of citations is extremely asymmetrical, it could very well be that the geographic de-concentration of production activities did not lead to the geographic de-concentration of citations, but instead contributed to creating increasingly asymmetrical flows of information for the benefit of “central” cities and countries. This article aims to verify whether this is the case by analysing the geographic distribution of citations received, using a method for localising the publications indexed in the Web of Science by urban areas. Results show a growing convergence between the geography of scientific production and that of scientific citations. The number of citations received by the world’s 30 top publishing countries and cities tended to edge closer to the global average. While Singapore, China, India and Iran suffered from a deficit of visibility in 2000, their level considerably improved by 2007. Moreover, a decrease in the discrepancy between cities’ scientific visibility is observed in almost all countries of the world, except for three: Sweden, Egypt and Denmark. To finish, our results show that the gap between the share of citations and the share of publications has decreased across all disciplines. A significant asymmetry in favour of English-speaking countries has remained in the distribution of citations in humanities and social sciences (but it is diminishing).

Suggested Citation

  • Marion Maisonobe & Michel Grossetti & Béatrice Milard & Laurent Jégou & Denis Eckert, 2017. "The global geography of scientific visibility: a deconcentration process (1999–2011)," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 113(1), pages 479-493, October.
    • Handle: RePEc:spr:scient:v:113:y:2017:i:1:d:10.1007_s11192-017-2463-2
    DOI: 10.1007/s11192-017-2463-2
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s11192-017-2463-2
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s11192-017-2463-2?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Renato A. Orozco Pereira & Ben Derudder, 2010. "Determinants of Dynamics in the World City Network, 2000-2004," Urban Studies, Urban Studies Journal Limited, vol. 47(9), pages 1949-1967, August.
    2. Leydesdorff, Loet & Wagner, Caroline S. & Bornmann, Lutz, 2014. "The European Union, China, and the United States in the top-1% and top-10% layers of most-frequently cited publications: Competition and collaborations," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 8(3), pages 606-617.
    3. George A. Lozano & Vincent Larivière & Yves Gingras, 2012. "The weakening relationship between the impact factor and papers' citations in the digital age," Journal of the Association for Information Science & Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 63(11), pages 2140-2145, November.
    4. Arthur S. Alderson & Jason Beckfield & Jessica Sprague-Jones, 2010. "Intercity Relations and Globalisation: The Evolution of the Global Urban Hierarchy, 1981—2007," Urban Studies, Urban Studies Journal Limited, vol. 47(9), pages 1899-1923, August.
    5. Éric Archambault & Étienne Vignola-Gagné & Grégoire Côté & Vincent Larivière & Yves Gingrasb, 2006. "Benchmarking scientific output in the social sciences and humanities: The limits of existing databases," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 68(3), pages 329-342, September.
    6. Liv Langfeldt & Mats Benner & Gunnar Sivertsen & Ernst H. Kristiansen & Dag W. Aksnes & Siri Brorstad Borlaug & Hanne Foss Hansen & Egil Kallerud & Antti Pelkonen, 2015. "Excellence and growth dynamics: A comparative study of the Matthew effect," Science and Public Policy, Oxford University Press, vol. 42(5), pages 661-675.
    7. Christian Wichmann Matthiessen & Annette Winkel Schwarz & Søren Find, 2010. "World Cities of Scientific Knowledge: Systems, Networks and Potential Dynamics. An Analysis Based on Bibliometric Indicators," Urban Studies, Urban Studies Journal Limited, vol. 47(9), pages 1879-1897, August.
    8. Vincent Larivière & Benoit Macaluso & Éric Archambault & Yves Gingras, 2010. "Which scientific elites? On the concentration of research funds, publications and citations," Research Evaluation, Oxford University Press, vol. 19(1), pages 45-53, March.
    9. Michel Grossetti & Denis Eckert & Yves Gingras & Laurent Jégou & Vincent Larivière & Béatrice Milard, 2014. "Cities and the geographical deconcentration of scientific activity: A multilevel analysis of publications (1987–2007)," Urban Studies, Urban Studies Journal Limited, vol. 51(10), pages 2219-2234, August.
    10. Zitt, M. & Barre, R. & Sigogneau, A. & Laville, F., 1999. "Territorial concentration and evolution of science and technology activities in the European Union: a descriptive analysis," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 28(5), pages 545-562, June.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Qinchang Gui & Chengliang Liu & DeBin Du, 2019. "The Structure and Dynamic of Scientific Collaboration Network among Countries along the Belt and Road," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 11(19), pages 1-17, September.
    2. Skupien, Stefan & Rüffin, Nicolas, 2020. "The Geography of Research Funding: Semantics and Beyond," EconStor Open Access Articles and Book Chapters, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics, vol. 24(1), pages 24-38.
    3. György Csomós & Zsófia Viktória Vida & Balázs Lengyel, 2020. "Exploring the changing geographical pattern of international scientific collaborations through the prism of cities," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 15(11), pages 1-20, November.
    4. A. Tuncer & F. Gezici, 2024. "Scientific collaborations within urban areas: the case of İstanbul," Review of Regional Research: Jahrbuch für Regionalwissenschaft, Springer;Gesellschaft für Regionalforschung (GfR), vol. 44(2), pages 151-162, June.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Maisonobe, Marion & Eckert, Denis & Grossetti, Michel & Jégou, Laurent & Milard, Béatrice, 2016. "The world network of scientific collaborations between cities: domestic or international dynamics?," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 10(4), pages 1025-1036.
    2. Yves Gingras & Mahdi Khelfaoui, 2018. "Assessing the effect of the United States’ “citation advantage” on other countries’ scientific impact as measured in the Web of Science (WoS) database," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 114(2), pages 517-532, February.
    3. Waltman, Ludo, 2016. "A review of the literature on citation impact indicators," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 10(2), pages 365-391.
    4. Vincent Larivière, 2012. "On the shoulders of students? The contribution of PhD students to the advancement of knowledge," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 90(2), pages 463-481, February.
    5. János József Tóth & Gergő Háló & Manuel Goyanes, 2023. "Beyond views, productivity, and citations: measuring geopolitical differences of scientific impact in communication research," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 128(10), pages 5705-5729, October.
    6. Ben Derudder & Christof Parnreiter, 2014. "Introduction: The Interlocking Network Model for Studying Urban Networks: Outline, Potential, Critiques, and Ways Forward," Tijdschrift voor Economische en Sociale Geografie, Royal Dutch Geographical Society KNAG, vol. 105(4), pages 373-386, September.
    7. Star X. Zhao & Wen Lou & Alice M. Tan & Shuang Yu, 2018. "Do funded papers attract more usage?," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 115(1), pages 153-168, April.
    8. Elias Sanz-Casado & Carlos García-Zorita & Ronald Rousseau, 2016. "Using h-cores to study the most-cited articles of the twenty-first century," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 108(1), pages 243-261, July.
    9. Wuestman, Mignon L. & Hoekman, Jarno & Frenken, Koen, 2019. "The geography of scientific citations," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 48(7), pages 1771-1780.
    10. Loet Leydesdorff & Dieter Franz Kogler & Bowen Yan, 2017. "Mapping patent classifications: portfolio and statistical analysis, and the comparison of strengths and weaknesses," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 112(3), pages 1573-1591, September.
    11. Wu, Jiang & Ou, Guiyan & Liu, Xiaohui & Dong, Ke, 2022. "How does academic education background affect top researchers’ performance? Evidence from the field of artificial intelligence," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 16(2).
    12. Ramón A. Feenstra & Emilio Delgado López-Cózar, 2022. "Philosophers’ appraisals of bibliometric indicators and their use in evaluation: from recognition to knee-jerk rejection," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 127(4), pages 2085-2103, April.
    13. Mehdi Rhaiem & Nabil Amara, 2020. "Determinants of research efficiency in Canadian business schools: evidence from scholar-level data," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 125(1), pages 53-99, October.
    14. Sándor Soós & Zsófia Vida & András Schubert, 2018. "Long-term trends in the multidisciplinarity of some typical natural and social sciences, and its implications on the SSH versus STM distinction," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 114(3), pages 795-822, March.
    15. Myriam Dunn Cavelty, 2018. "Cybersecurity Research Meets Science and Technology Studies," Politics and Governance, Cogitatio Press, vol. 6(2), pages 22-30.
    16. David I Stern, 2014. "High-Ranked Social Science Journal Articles Can Be Identified from Early Citation Information," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 9(11), pages 1-11, November.
    17. Giovanni Abramo & Ciriaco Andrea D’Angelo & Flavia Costa, 2023. "Correlating article citedness and journal impact: an empirical investigation by field on a large-scale dataset," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 128(3), pages 1877-1894, March.
    18. Zsolt Kohus & Márton Demeter & László Kun & Eszter Lukács & Katalin Czakó & Gyula Péter Szigeti, 2022. "A Study of the Relation between Byline Positions of Affiliated/Non-Affiliated Authors and the Scientific Impact of European Universities in Times Higher Education World University Rankings," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(20), pages 1-14, October.
    19. Ülle Must, 2012. "Alone or together: examples from history research," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 91(2), pages 527-537, May.
    20. Lanu Kim & Jason H. Portenoy & Jevin D. West & Katherine W. Stovel, 2020. "Scientific journals still matter in the era of academic search engines and preprint archives," Journal of the Association for Information Science & Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 71(10), pages 1218-1226, October.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:spr:scient:v:113:y:2017:i:1:d:10.1007_s11192-017-2463-2. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.